| Author | Post |
|---|
Richard6218
Regular Member
|
Posted: Mon Jul 27th, 2009 06:13 pm |
|
Well, it appears the Whatcom County parks ordinance repeal is stalled, and the promises made to me by County Commisioner Sam Crawford have gone by the board. Some months ago after discussing preemption with Crawford and Sheriff Bill Elfo I was promised that a draft of a repeal ordinance was working its way through legal review and would be submitted July 7 for consideration at the meeting of July 21. On the 20th I looked at the agenda online for the meeting the next night and it was conspicuous by its absence. A call to Crawford was not returned.
Next move???
|
joeroket
Regular Member
|
Posted: Tue Jul 28th, 2009 12:27 am |
|
| I would call him a few more times and send him both an e-mail and registered letter asking exactly the same thing.
|
Richard6218
Regular Member
|
Posted: Tue Jul 28th, 2009 08:36 am |
|
Joe, I think you're right that persistence may pay off, but I'm always wary with politicians of pushing things too hard and just p---ing them off. Then we become a pest and they don't respond at all. But it's worth another run at it.
Another thought: he may think I'm just a solo actor here and so he doesn't need to do things for one citizen acting alone. But if he hears from several other people who are his own constituents he's more likely to move on it. To that end, here's his phone number: 360-671-7262, a direct line. (May be a cell phone) He can be reached also at the Whatcom County website/commissioners/Sam Crawford.
I'm really disappointed about this. I thought I had a "done deal" and as politicians like to do, he screwed me. 
|
BigDave
Opt-Out Member
|
Posted: Tue Aug 4th, 2009 03:23 am |
|
Just an update on the City of Yakima Ordinances, I have sent letters to city attorney and emails to all City Council Members and as of to date not one reply.
Today I took it one step farther and started calling the candidates who are up for reelection or running for office and was able to contact one sitting council member Micah Cawley and one prospective council member David Ettl and discussed the issue of how can citizens expect their voice is going to be heard when it is very evident they do not answers letters, emails or phone calls?
The current council member said he was sorry but he would be sending in to council and will get back to me soon, hmm something to do with election time I guess, if it works then great.
The other agreed that the council needs to listen to who they represent and is appalled by not receiving a response.
I continued with the aspect of out dated city ordinances that house keeping should come into play and take care of matters and Ettl agreed fully and with the armed citizen should not be impaired.
The city council is battling a very negative reputation right now do to being caught up in a violation of the open meetings act which was publicized here in Yakima recently.
My next stop is a council meeting to bring up the issues of State Preemption and Emergency Powers, I told them I was hoping to deal with this quietly but if they prefer to handle this in lets say a more public view then that is fine, as many know Yakima is having a terrible time with gang violence, with close to 10 shootings in the past 9 days or so and some where around 20 since last may. I do not like the idea of gang members find out they can legally carry in parks if they have not had their rights taken away, but law abiding citizens and take the responsibility seriously will know.
Last edited on Tue Aug 4th, 2009 03:25 am by BigDave
|
Gene Beasley
Regular Member
|
Posted: Tue Aug 4th, 2009 04:47 am |
|
BigDave wrote: [snip] as many know Yakima is having a terrible time with gang violence, with close to 10 shootings in the past 9 days or so and some where around 20 since last may. I do not like the idea of gang members find out they can legally carry in parks if they have not had their rights taken away, but law abiding citizens and take the responsibility seriously will know.
You also want to be able to protect yourself and yours from said miscreants. Good luck.
|
BigDave
Opt-Out Member
|
Posted: Wed Aug 5th, 2009 07:41 pm |
|
Yakima City Council Member Micah Cawley has just contacted me, he has contacted the City Manager and awaiting his response and most likely a fix to the ordinances and he will contact me when he can get the council to adopt this change.
I must say I am happy to see him respond and will make myself available to assist if questions arise.
Dave
|
Bull Frog
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Aug 7th, 2009 06:06 am |
|
Wow. Good work. I was born in Bremerton, and arrested for CCW while open carrying hitchhiking (LOC) near Olympia. I had a court appointed lawyer (circa 1975) but was still convicted for CCW. Yes, open carry on a holster, loaded of course, but this was close to the year of love. I thought I could go camping with my gun. I still remember the deputy at the jail moaning as he unloaded my .22 pea shooter - you'd think he'd just arrested John Dillinger.
The Washington State Police arrested and incarcerated me, and could not be bothered to charge me with the correct crime (if there was one). And the lawyer? What a joke he was - he started to explain the gun was not concealed, the judge overrulled him - and I was found guilty, with time served. What a crock. It's not a whole lot better today. Got money? Get heard. Indigent? You're a turd, unworthy of human rights.
Got money?
|
BigDave
Opt-Out Member
|
Posted: Mon Aug 17th, 2009 09:31 pm |
|
I just spoke with Councilmen Micah Calley of the City of Yakima and per our conversation it is in the works to removes any mention as to firearms as the State governs the restrictions on firearms and hopes this will be concluded with in a couple of weeks.
It is good to see things moving in this direction to correct these out of date ordinances.
Thanks Micah
Big Dave
|
jddssc121
Regular Member
| Joined: | Thu May 22nd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 166 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 28th, 2009 11:11 pm |
|
Redmond has been fixed
|
Richard6218
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Aug 29th, 2009 09:04 am |
|
I have posted the saga of the Whatcom County code about county parks going back to, I believe, about the first of this year. I got one promise after another and I actually thought things were going quite well, for a while. Mr. Crawford of the County Council assured me that he would present a draft resolution to the Council at their meeting of July 7 for consideration at the subsequent meeting July 14. That didn't happen. I called him a on the 14th when I looked up the agenda for that night's meeting and found the item not on the docket. He never returned my call. I didn't get around to the next step until Aug. 19, but got ambitious and wrote the letter below. It has now been ten days and no reply to this.
If there are any Whatcom County residents out there I sure could use some support on this. Here is another example of politicians ignoring the will of the people. 
August 19, 2009
Honorable Sam Crawford
Whatcom County Council
311 Grand Avenue, Suite 105
Bellingham, WA 98225
Re: WCC 9.32.085
Dear Mr. Crawford:
It has been some two months since we last discussed the conflict between the referenced County Code Section concerning county regulation of firearms in county-owned parks and the State law of pre-emption, RCW 9.41.290. In our last discussion you expressed a hope that, following a legal review which you requested, the matter would be presented for scheduling at the Council meeting of July 7, 2009 and docketed for consideration by the full Council July 21. This apparently has not happened, and I have not heard from you about what may have been the reason(s) why.
I know that you are familiar with all the details, but please bear with me as I summarize for the record. WCC 9.32.085 states in part:
9.32.085 Unlawful firearms and/or weapons in parks
A. It is unlawful within a county-owned park for any person to:
1. Display, exhibit or draw any firearm or dangerous weapon; or
2. Leave any firearm or dangerous weapon unattended and unsecured or exposed to public view; or …..
B. The following are affirmative defenses to a violation of this section, which the defendant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence:
1. The activity …..
2. Any person acting for the purpose of protecting himself or herself against the use of presently threatened unlawful force by another or for the purpose of protecting another against the use of such unlawful force by a third person.
3. Any person making or assisting in making a lawful arrest for the commission of a felony.
The State law of preemption says the following:
RCW 9.41.290
State preemption.
The state of Washington hereby fully occupies and preempts the entire field of firearms regulation within the boundaries of the state, including the registration, licensing, possession, purchase, sale, acquisition, transfer, discharge, and transportation of firearms, or any other element relating to firearms or parts thereof, including ammunition and reloader components. Cities, towns, and counties or other municipalities may enact
Honorable Sam Crawford August 19, 2009
only those laws and ordinances relating to firearms that are specifically authorized by state law, as in RCW 9.41.300, and are consistent with this chapter. Such local ordinances shall have the same penalty as provided for by state law. Local laws and ordinances that are inconsistent with, more restrictive than, or exceed the requirements of state law shall not be enacted and are preempted and repealed, regardless of the nature of the code, charter, or home rule status of such city, town, county, or municipality.
The direct conflict is between WCC 9.32.085(A)(1) and RCW 9.41.270 regarding the carrying of weapons for the purpose of self-defense.
Our purpose was to enact an appropriate amendment to bring the County Code into compliance with State law. When we last addressed the question I was confident that your draft legislation would be adopted at the July 21 meeting of the County Council. I would appreciate your earliest response with an update to this, if any.
Sincerely,
|
Richard6218
Regular Member
|
Posted: Tue Sep 1st, 2009 05:57 pm |
|
| Just got off the phone with Sam Crawford about the Whatcom County code issue. He did a lot of mea culpa about why this hasn't been done. Long and short: he's 100% with us on this, and he blames workload for the delay. He says the Council is taking the whole month of August off, and the next meeting will be 9/15. He also says his priority lately has been getting more conservatives elected to the Council. I didn't want to lean too hard on him because he is on our side. So we just need to keep the issue in front of him till it gets done.
|
BigDave
Opt-Out Member
|
Posted: Wed Sep 2nd, 2009 06:24 am |
|
City of Yakima Council Meeting today had this issue of the gun ban concerning City Cemetery on the agenda today until I contacted Micah Cawley and reminded him we need to address the gun ban on the City Parks and the Cities Emergency Powers to prohibit gun possession outside the home as well.
As I was watching the Council Meeting Micah Cawley removed the included change of the City Ordinance for the Cemetery so the remaining Ordinances could be added and acted upon and with his email this evening, the City Ordinances concerning Firearms to come into compliance with Washington State Law.
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 9:56 PM, Cawley, Micah <mcawley@ci.yakima.wa.us> wrote:
Hi, I took it of the consent agenda to make sure that we updated all the city laws you asked for! It passed 7-0 vote and is now in line with the 2nd amendment. Thanks for your leadership on this issue. -Micah
I am sure it will take a little bit to update the online ordinances, which Micah has advised me they will be deleted.
If you get a chance send Micah a High Five for moving ahead on this issue, remember I have contacted all the council members, The Mayor and City Attorney and he is the only one that responded.
DaveLast edited on Wed Sep 2nd, 2009 06:31 am by BigDave
|
BigDave
Opt-Out Member
|
Posted: Wed Sep 2nd, 2009 05:59 pm |
|
I am posting this in hopes someone else can gain something from what my experience was.
This had to do with City Ordinances that prohibited possession of firearms outside of RCW 9.41.290/300 and right to carry under Article 1 § 24 of the Washington State Constitution
13.16.120 Parks and Playgrounds, Rules and Regulations Firearms prohibited—Throwing prohibited
7.04 (F) Tahoma Cemetery
6.06 Emergency Powers of Mayor, City Council and City Manager
from Cawley, Micah <mcawley@ci.yakima.wa.us>
to dapoling@gmail.com
date Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 9:56 PM
subject Re: City Ordinances
mailed-by ci.yakima.wa.us
9:56 PM (11 hours ago)
Hi, I took it of the consent agenda to make sure that we updated all the city laws you asked for! It passed 7-0 vote and is now in line with the 2nd amendment. Thanks for your leadership on this issue. -Micah
And when I asked Mr Cawley what wording or removal was to be changed he replied.
from Cawley, Micah <mcawley@ci.yakima.wa.us>
to dapoling@gmail.com
date Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 10:25 PM
subject Re: City Ordinances
mailed-by ci.yakima.wa.us
10:25 PM (10 hours ago)
Hi Dave, there is no re-wording, it has been removed from the city laws, since we can't enforce it! Good thing you caught this before we were sued or challenged. Let me know if there is anything else I can do. -Micah
When I first started this I ran into road blocks to say the least with trying to contact the City Attorney, Sending emails to all the council members with no response and I even setup a meeting with the Chief of Police which was in my view a good move to get an inside position of the Department.
After spinning my wheels I contacted Atty Mark Knapp for his help http://firearmslawyer.net/ and having him draft a letter for me to present to the council and legal staff.
I was also in contact with Gene Beasley which contributed some wisdom as well to this matter as he has been successful as well.
I then started calling Council Members and the first one to answer was Micah Cawley and with the information provided and things moved ahead quickly.
Here is the letter that Mr Knapp formulated on my behalf.
Recently I visited local parks in the city and found signage prohibiting the possession of firearms even by those that are legal to carry for self-defense in a responsible manner.
When reading the Parks Program Guide I found at the bottom of page 13. It describes City Ordinance 13.16 which lists “Please leave these items at home: …” which began my search into the firearms laws listed in City Ordinances.
Yakima Municipal Code list the following codes that are in violation of State 9.41.290 and RCW 9.41.300 that work in concert to ensure that firearms laws are uniform throughout the state with respect to a persons right to carry under Article 1 § 24 of the Washington State Constitution.
The following Yakima City Ordinances have not been updated since their passage to come with in compliance:
· 13.16.120 Parks and Playgrounds, Rules and Regulations Firearms prohibited—Throwing prohibited
· 7.04 (F) Tahoma Cemetery
· 6.06 Emergency Powers of Mayor, City Council and City Manager
While I am of the opinion that YMC 6.06.030 falls outside of the spirit and letter of the RCW’s in where the governor has the sole power and duty to proclaim an emergency (RCW 43.06.010 § 12) that is outside of the scope of this letter.
Irrespective of any interpretation of the rest of YMC 6.06.030, subsections 5, 6, and 7 are in excess of the very specific circumstances outlined in RCW 9.41.300 and need to be entirely stricken
In addition to reviewing the above items, I would ask that you review the RCW 9.41.290/300, Attorney General Opinion 2008 No. 8, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals opinion in Nordyke v. King (April 20, 2009) and D.C. v. Heller and as of recently two-thirds of the nation’s attorneys general have filed an amicus brief asking the U.S. Supreme Court to grant certiorari in the case of NRA v. Chicago and hold that the Second Amendment applies to state and local governments through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
I recently had a private meeting with Chief Granato and discussed these issues and came to the conclusion that the Cities Ordinances prohibiting firearms are not enforceable and if cited it would be thrown out in court right away as to RCW 9.41.290 State Preemption.
During the discussion I found that Chief Granato is a supported of the 2nd Amendment and have seen several cases here and elsewhere law-abiding citizens have saved their life or possibly lives of others. It is my view the Chief supports legally armed citizens and hopes many will seek training above the requirement by the State as I do.
As with many Police forces through out the U.S. not all Officers are aware of the Cities Ordinances listed above are not enforceable in Yakima.
I am requesting the city council to review, amend or remove the wordage that prohibits lawful carry of firearms in the City Limits to come in compliance with Washington State thus protecting the citizens of Yakima in their exercise of their right to self defense.
Thank You.
David Poling
Yakima, WA 98902
dapoling@gmail.com
|
BigDave
Opt-Out Member
|
Posted: Thu Sep 3rd, 2009 07:10 am |
|
Update Yakima City Council, the video to this is at Y-PAC and go to the time stamp 38:25.
I was under the understanding in emails from Council Member Micah Cawley that all Ordinance I raised where passed and removed.
After watching the video I found out that the Parks Ordinance was removed May 2009 and the Cemetery Ordinance was removed last night 09-01-2009 and they did not vote on the Ordinance to do with Emergency Powers do to City Legal Council Brandon Farm Recommendation not to remove it do to legal matters based on the Civil War and Martial Law in Other Countries! Yes he said Martial Law in Other Countries!
He does not address the issue of as it relates to the Washington State Constitution Article , RCW 9.41.290 State Preemption and RCW 43.06.010 § 12 General powers and duties in which the Governor has sole power to and duty to proclaim an emergency in Washington State.
There has been talk about incorporation of the Second Amendment at the Federal level but remember Washington State Constitution has already acknowledge it being an individual right and the City Council has already recognized that the State maintains jurisdiction on gun related issues as defined in RCW 9.41.290.
So the remaining issue in the City of Yakima is YMC 6.06.030 Emergency Powers in which I am trying to get back on the agenda.
I dropped the ball as I did not attend the meeting for the 3 hours do to the heat and my health, but I will not make that mistake next time.
Last edited on Thu Sep 3rd, 2009 08:19 am by BigDave
|
U8Dust
Regular Member
| Joined: | Tue Jul 7th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 74 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Sep 9th, 2009 06:28 pm |
|
obviously there is a reason why the local codes contradict state law. because the city is much smarter than the state on gun regulations
|
wrightme
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Oct 19th, 2008 |
| Location: | Fallon, Nevada USA |
| Posts: | 1361 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Sep 9th, 2009 06:46 pm |
|
U8Dust wrote: obviously there is a reason why the local codes contradict state law. because the city is much smarter than the state on gun regulations
Not obvious. Also, not necessarily correct. It is most likely that your comment is only because what this specific city does is in line with your views, and has nothing to do with "much smarter."
|
Right Wing Wacko
Campaign Veteran
|
Posted: Thu Sep 10th, 2009 02:14 am |
|
State Preemption exists for one reason: To prevent confusion.
Imagine if every city or county enacted their own gun laws. The chances are many of these laws would conflict with each other.
Then imagine a drive along I-5 from Blaine to Vancouver WA, with law changing every couple miles. It would be IMPOSSIBLE for one to obey the law, worse it would be practically impossible for some LE that work in multiple jurisdictions to know what laws they can enforce on this side of the highway vs the other side.
The legislature wisely decided that there would be ONE set of laws for the entire state to avoid such confusion.
Anti-Gunners on the other hand thrive on the confusion. They hope to make the laws so confusing that we just give up.
Well.... Not going to happen!
Last edited on Thu Sep 10th, 2009 02:16 am by Right Wing Wacko
|
BigDave
Opt-Out Member
|
Posted: Thu Sep 10th, 2009 03:01 am |
|
U8Dust wrote: obviously there is a reason why the local codes contradict state law. because the city is much smarter than the state on gun regulations
It is obvious that you do not read or comprehend the information presented.
Here is a copy of the Robert T Stafford Disaster Relief Bill that was signed into law by President Bush after the Katrina Disaster.
In short Federal funds will not be available to those areas during an emergency or disaster if gun confiscation is occurring or occurred.
http://www.iaem.com/committees/governmentaffairs/documents/stafford020807.pdf
SEC. 706. FIREARMS POLICIES.
(a) PROHIBITION ON CONFISCATION OF FIREARMS.—No officer or
employee of the United States (including any member of the uniformed
services), or person operating pursuant to or under color of
Federal law, or receiving Federal funds, or under control of any
Federal official, or providing services to such an officer, employee,
or other person, while acting in support of relief from a major disaster
or emergency, may—
(1) temporarily or permanently seize, or authorize seizure
of, any firearm the possession of which is not prohibited under
Federal, State, or local law, other than for forfeiture in compliance
with Federal law or as evidence in a criminal investigation;
(2) require registration of any firearm for which registration
is not required by Federal, State, or local law;
(3) prohibit possession of any firearm, or promulgate any
rule, regulation, or order prohibiting possession of any firearm,
in any place or by any person where such possession is not otherwise
prohibited by Federal, State, or local law; or
(4) prohibit the carrying of firearms by any person otherwise
authorized to carry firearms under Federal, State, or local
January 9, 2007
Sec. 705 ROBERT T. STAFFORD DISASTER RELIEF 62
law, solely because such person is operating under the direction,
control, or supervision of a Federal agency in support of
relief from the major disaster or emergency.
(b) LIMITATION.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to
prohibit any person in subsection (a) from requiring the temporary
surrender of a firearm as a condition for entry into any mode of
transportation used for rescue or evacuation during a major disaster
or emergency, provided that such temporarily surrendered
firearm is returned at the completion of such rescue or evacuation.
(c) PRIVATE RIGHTS OF ACTION.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Any individual aggrieved by a violation
of this section may seek relief in an action at law, suit in equity,
or other proper proceeding for redress against any person
who subjects such individual, or causes such individual to be
subjected, to the deprivation of any of the rights, privileges, or
immunities secured by this section.
(2) REMEDIES.—In addition to any existing remedy in law
or equity, under any law, an individual aggrieved by the seizure
or confiscation of a firearm in violation of this section may
bring an action for return of such firearm in the United States
district court in the district in which that individual resides or
in which such firearm may be found.
(3) ATTORNEY FEES.—In any action or proceeding to enforce
this section, the court shall award the prevailing party,
other than the United States, a reasonable attorney’s fee as
part of the costs.
(42 U.S.C. 5207)
January 9, 2007
|
BigDave
Opt-Out Member
|
Posted: Wed Oct 7th, 2009 03:48 am |
|
I just returned from the Yakima City Council Meeting in which the Senior City Attorney H. Harvey researched the Emergency Powers in Prohibiting Firearms in the City during an Emergency or Disaster.
After the City Attorney report I was able to talk and referred- Washington State Constitution as holding it as an individual right to keep and bear arms and that it shall not be impaired and by keeping this Ordinance on the books will impair our rights to self defense.
- The Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act that came in lieu of Hurricane Katrina and the possibility of the State and City violating this Federal Law.
- We all agree we do not want criminals to have firearms but all this law will do is take away a Right to Self Defense during a time we really need it.
A proposal was made for the legal staff to draft a New Emergency Powers Ordinance removing the enactment of prohibiting firearms possession outside the home or business, which is to be ready at the next Council Meeting on Oct 20 2009, the proposal was passed unanimously by the Council.
There were some very positive remarks made by the Mayor and other Council Members as well, yes even our Mayor that belongs to MAIG supported this removal as well.
In 2 weeks I should be able to report back with positive results of having the Emergency Powers prohibiting firearms during an emergency or disaster.
This will conclude my addressing the City of Yakima on legal firearms possession and will be seeking to address issues with Yakima County.
This is the documentation I presented to the Mayor, Council and Legal Staff prior to the meeting.
To Mayor and Council October 6, 2009
From David Poling
I am addressing the issue of the City maintaining Emergency Powers 6.06(a)(7) prohibiting firearms outside the home or business.
This is an issue of the law abiding in our City being threaten to have our Right of Self Defense as provided for in our Washington State Constitution, in a period of time where our very lives could be placed in jeopardy by vandals, gangs or others that may threaten our safety.
Laws as this only affect the law-abiding citizens and will do one of two things, disarm those in a time of need to provide for their Self Defense, or forced them to break the law to ensure their safety.
This law will not stop the criminal element, as they will continue to ignore the laws.
To enact this prohibition the Governor must make a proclamation as prescribed in RCW 06.010 and then apply the restriction in RCW 43.06.220.
Without it the Cities ability to enact prohibitions on firearms is non-existent as it will be outside the scope of RCW 9.41.290.
What really takes me back is a recommendation or attitude of we have never enacted this law nor do we foresee we ever will, or just because another City has adopted a similar ordinance that is also outside the RCW’s, a recommendation of taking no action, is beyond belief.
I certainly hope our Mayor and Council will act and remove this Prohibition in the Cities Emergency Powers.
Reference Material.
Washington State Constitution
ARTICLE I DECLARATION OF RIGHTS
SECTION 24 RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS.
The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain or employ an armed body of men.
RCW 9.41.290 State preemption.
The state of Washington hereby fully occupies and preempts the entire field of firearms regulation within the boundaries of the state, including the registration, licensing, possession, purchase, sale, acquisition, transfer, discharge, and transportation of firearms, or any other element relating to firearms or parts thereof, including ammunition and reloader components. Cities, towns, and counties or other municipalities may enact only those laws and ordinances relating to firearms that are specifically authorized by state law, as in RCW 9.41.300, and are consistent with this chapter. Such local ordinances shall have the same penalty as provided for by state law. Local laws and ordinances that are inconsistent with, more restrictive than, or exceed the requirements of state law shall not be enacted and are preempted and repealed, regardless of the nature of the code, charter, or home rule status of such city, town, county, or municipality.
Attorney General Opinion 2008 No. 8
Reaffirms that Washington State maintains jurisdiction on firearms laws and Cities, Towns and Municipalities ordinances are preempted.
RCW 06.010
Governor General powers and duties. (12) The governor may, after finding that a public disorder, disaster, energy emergency, or riot exists within this state or any part thereof which affects life, health, property, or the public peace, proclaim a state of emergency in the area affected, and the powers granted the governor during a state of emergency shall be effective only within the area described in the proclamation;
RCW 43.06.220
State of emergency -- Powers of governor pursuant to proclamation.
(1) The governor after proclaiming a state of emergency and prior to terminating such, may, in the area described by the proclamation issue an order prohibiting:
(e) The possession of firearms or any other deadly weapon by a person (other than a law enforcement officer) in a place other than that person's place of residence or business;
Better known as the ROBERT T. STAFFORD DISASTER RELIEF AND
EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE ACT, 42 USC Sec. 5207 01/08/2008
By enacting a prohibition on possession of firearms outside the home or business during a Disaster or Emergency could pose legal jeopardy to the City in U.S. District Court.
|
BigDave
Opt-Out Member
|
Posted: Thu Oct 22nd, 2009 05:54 am |
|
Last night Oct 20, 2009 Yakima Cities Emergency Powers concerning YMC Section 6.06.030(A)(7) Prohibiting Firearms Outside the Home or Business during a declared Emergency by the City was removed.
I talked with Yakima's City Attorney and discussed the statement "makes limited additional changes in a new YMC Section 6.06.030(C)" in the Council Agenda Minutes.
This statement has to do with if the city in the time of an Emergency may request to the Governor to enact the powers provided in RCW 43.06.220, which as never been invoked since conception and hopefully stays that way and hopefully be removed in the future.
There is House Bill 1832 in House Judiciary that has gone no where to have a hearing on prohibiting firearms outside the home or business being unconstitutional ( Washington State Constitution Article I Section 24 Right to Keep and Bear Arms )
Hopefully HB 1832 will be moved this year out of the House Judiciary to a committee that can get it a hearing.
We still face a majority in Olympia that opposes passing anything positive on firearms.
This is a small victory but at least it is out of the hands of future Mayors and Council.
|
Current time is 12:18 am | Page:   1 2 3 4 5 6 7   |
|
|
|
